If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

"After their velvet revolution, nobody is going to accuse the new regime in Egypt of being in America's pocket, and that is a good thing."

No one is going to accuse them of being in America's pocket because they stood against dictatorships which were in America's pocket.

I fail to see how that contradicts what I said.

And if you're going to link a chart, you really ought to link the article the chart is tied to, so we know exactly what's being charted. I said Obama's image was slipping due to his continuation of Bush policies, and so does the article. I said Obama's overall foreign policy is still a stark positive break from previous, and so does the article.

Indeed, to quote that very same Pew Research article, since you didn't get past the headline,

Overall Ratings for U.S. Mostly Positive

Majorities or pluralities in 12 countries express a favorable opinion of the United States, while the prevailing view is negative in only five nations. In three countries views are closely divided.

Attitudes toward the U.S. are generally more positive today than in 2008, the final year of the George W. Bush administration. The biggest improvements in America’s image have occurred among Europeans – in France, Spain, and Germany, the percentage of people with a positive view of the U.S. is at least 20 percentage points higher than in 2008.

[...]

Even in many nations where overall ratings for the U.S. remain low, however, certain aspects of American “soft power” are often well-regarded. For instance, the American way of doing business is especially popular in the Arab World – more than half in Lebanon (63%), Tunisia (59%), Jordan (59%) and Egypt (52%) say they like this element of America’s image.

I wonder what the result of this election will mean for the future platform of the GOP. Surely the party strategist have realized by now that pandering to the right-wing extremists was a mistake and will lead to their downfall in the long run, as the influence of White males continues to dwindle. Ironically quite a large part of Hispanics and Blacks are conservative, politically speaking, but the Republican's blatant racism kept them from voting for Romney. If the GOP wants to stay relevant in the coming years they'll have to rid themselves of their xenophobic image and appeal to immigrants. Bush, for all his other flaws, understood this and the Hispanic votes were a large reason for his re-election in 2004.

Originally Posted by mickygor

Black Obama won, White Obama lost. No significant change anywhere else, not that change was possible in the first place. I'm mildly disappointed that the liberty movement didn't do better, but eh, it's time to focus on 2014.

Ironically quite a large part of Hispanics and Blacks are conservative, politically speaking, but the Republican's blatant racism kept them from voting for Romney.

A lot of Blacks and Hispanics are - or used to be - conservative socially, but I would never really say that a significant subset are conservative economically. Unless you're talking about Miami Cubans.

But yeah, "self-deporting" doesn't fly with Latinos.

NalanoH. Wildmoon
Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
Attorney at Lawl
"His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

A lot of Blacks and Hispanics are - or used to be - conservative socially, but I would never really say that a significant subset are conservative economically. Unless you're talking about Miami Cubans.

You're right, my bad. I meant to write socially conservative. Though I could imagine the number of African Americans that consider themselves fiscally conservative would still be higher than the number that ended up voting for Romney.

And thanks for that article, interesting stuff.

Originally Posted by Hypernetic

Yeah pretty much.

In that case, maybe the reason they didn't do too well is because no one was quite sure what to make of them. I've asked a few libertarians what they actually desired and the only consistent answer I got was more freedom. Which is such an amazingly vague term that you might as well not even bother.

Then again, the lack of any concrete plans didn't really stop Mitt Romney.

In that case, maybe the reason they didn't do too well is because no one was quite sure what to make of them. I've asked a few libertarians what they actually desired and the only consistent answer I got was more freedom. Which is such an amazingly vague term that you might as well not even bother.

That's mainly because libertarians just want lower taxes but don't want to be considered the callous antisocietal blowhards they really are when people rightly point out that this largely equates to "fuck the poor and their social programs."

Originally Posted by Shane

@Nalano, my point was that Obama isn't the apple of the world's eye like you say.

Your point is sour grapes, which fits with the rest of your posts when it comes to the US.

Last edited by Nalano; 08-11-2012 at 12:49 PM.

NalanoH. Wildmoon
Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
Attorney at Lawl
"His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

I think the problem is that non-Americans judge the candidates based on foreign policy, while Americans (understandably) choose more or less based on internal policies. I can understand that Obama is the lesser of two evils (that is if you accept the idea that there are only 2 choices) but I cannot get my head around all the celebrations for a man who, to all intents and purposes, takes an active part in extra-judiciary assassinations of foreign nationals (or criminals or whatever you want to call them) through drones... If this was any other head of state (imagine Iran's),everyone would be screaming 'violations of human rights' etc.